State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza

2004-09-01

03

Amy Vezza

IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent

2004-09-01

03

Amy Vezza

IESG has approved the document

2004-09-01

03

Amy Vezza

Closed "Approve" ballot

2004-08-31

03

Alex Zinin

State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed by Alex Zinin

2004-06-02

03

Alex Zinin

pinged the chairs about the RFC-Ed note again.

2004-04-09

03

(System)

New version available: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mtu-extensions-03.txt

2004-04-03

02

(System)

Removed from agenda for telechat - 2004-04-02

2004-04-02

02

Amy Vezza

State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza

2004-04-02

02

Margaret Wasserman

[Ballot comment]While I'm not sure that this cold be subject of a discuss, the level of jargon (unexpanded acronyms in particular) in this ...

[Ballot comment]While I'm not sure that this cold be subject of a discuss, the level of jargon (unexpanded acronyms in particular) in this document makes it hard to understand.

2004-04-02

02

Thomas Narten

[Ballot comment]carry MTU information for a FEC between adjacent LSRs in LDP Label

expand/define FEC?

Ditto for other terms on first use? E ...

[Ballot comment]carry MTU information for a FEC between adjacent LSRs in LDP Label

expand/define FEC?

Ditto for other terms on first use? E.g., TLV?

> 2.4. MTU TLV

surprised that there isn't a line here saying length is always 2 (orwhatever it is, since its presumably fixed.)

> Changes in MTU for sections of an LSP may cause intermediate LSRs to> generate unsolicited label Mapping messages to advertise the new MTU.> LSRs which do not support MTU signalling MUST accept these messages,> but MAY ignore them (see Section 2.1).>

don't understand the reference to 2.1. Also wording is odd, saying animplementation that doesn't support this spec "MAY" ignoremessages. Don't they kind of do that be definition? Certainly not animplementation decision in the MAY sense.

2004-04-02

02

Bert Wijnen

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen by Bert Wijnen

2004-04-02

02

Thomas Narten

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Thomas Narten by Thomas Narten

2004-04-02

02

Allison Mankin

[Ballot comment]The TCP spoofing attack and the remedy are way too tersely mentioned -it's impossible to understand how they fit in.

2004-04-02

02

Allison Mankin

[Ballot Position Update] New position, Undefined, has been recorded for Allison Mankin by Allison Mankin

2004-04-02

02

Bill Fenner

[Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Bill Fenner by Bill Fenner

2004-04-01

02

Harald Alvestrand

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Harald Alvestrand by Harald Alvestrand

2004-04-01

02

David Kessens

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for David Kessens by David Kessens

2004-04-01

02

Margaret Wasserman

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Margaret Wasserman by Margaret Wasserman

2004-03-30

02

Russ Housley

[Ballot comment]There are a lot of acronyms in the first two paragraphs of the Introduction that are not expanded.

Please add a ...

[Ballot comment]There are a lot of acronyms in the first two paragraphs of the Introduction that are not expanded.

Please add a pointer to section 5 of [2] in the Security Considerations.

2004-03-30

02

Russ Housley

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley

2004-03-30

02

Scott Hollenbeck

[Ballot comment]The draft says it updates RFC 3036, which implies it should also be a Standards Track document and not Experimental as currently identified ...

[Ballot comment]The draft says it updates RFC 3036, which implies it should also be a Standards Track document and not Experimental as currently identified. Either that or the document should be changed to not update 3036.

2004-03-30

02

Scott Hollenbeck

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Scott Hollenbeck by Scott Hollenbeck

2004-03-29

02

Ted Hardie

[Ballot comment]Reviewed as a candidate for Experimental, since that was the category on the agenda;note that the document lists a category of Standards ...

[Ballot comment]Reviewed as a candidate for Experimental, since that was the category on the agenda;note that the document lists a category of Standards Track, and an RFC Editornote to clear that up is required.

2004-03-29

02

Ted Hardie

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Hardie by Ted Hardie

2004-03-26

02

Steven Bellovin

[Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Steve Bellovin by Steve Bellovin

2004-03-26

02

Alex Zinin

[Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Alex Zinin

2004-03-26

02

Alex Zinin

Ballot has been issued by Alex Zinin

2004-03-26

02

Alex Zinin

Created "Approve" ballot

2004-03-25

02

Alex Zinin

State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for Writeup::External Party by Alex Zinin

2004-03-25

02

Alex Zinin

No implementations of this spec. The WG would like to change the target status to EXP.

2004-03-25

02

Alex Zinin

Intended Status has been changed to Experimental from Proposed Standard

2004-03-25

02

Alex Zinin

Placed on agenda for telechat - 2004-04-02 by Alex Zinin

2003-12-10

02

Alex Zinin

State Changes to Waiting for Writeup::External Party from Waiting for Writeup by Alex Zinin

2003-12-10

02

Alex Zinin

waiting for implementation info

2003-12-10

02

Alex Zinin

[Note]: 'waiting for updateAZ: check with chairs' has been cleared by Alex Zinin

2003-11-14

02

(System)

State has been changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call by system

2003-10-31

02

Amy Vezza

Last call sent

2003-10-31

02

Amy Vezza

State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza

2003-10-30

02

Alex Zinin

Last Call was requested by Alex Zinin

2003-10-30

02

Alex Zinin

State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation by Alex Zinin

2003-10-30

02

(System)

Ballot writeup text was added

2003-10-30

02

(System)

Last call text was added

2003-10-30

02

(System)

Ballot approval text was added

2003-10-22

02

Alex Zinin

State Changes to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested by Alex Zinin

2003-10-08

02

Dinara Suleymanova

Intended Status has been changed to Proposed Standard from Standard

2003-10-08

02

Dinara Suleymanova

State Changes to Publication Requested from AD Evaluation::Revised ID Needed by Dinara Suleymanova

2003-10-08

02

Dinara Suleymanova

Intended Status has been changed to Standard from Proposed Standard

2003-10-08

02

(System)

New version available: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mtu-extensions-02.txt

2003-06-09

01

(System)

New version available: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mtu-extensions-01.txt

2003-03-22

00

Alex Zinin

Taking over after Scott

2003-03-22

00

Alex Zinin

Shepherding AD has been changed to Zinin, Alex from Bradner, Scott

2002-10-05

00

Scott Bradner

State Changes to AD Evaluation -- New ID Needed from AD Evaluation -- External Party by sob

2002-08-15

00

Scott Bradner

2002-08-15 - nomalize state name

2002-08-15

00

Scott Bradner

responsible has been changed to Working Group from Scott

2002-08-15

00

Scott Bradner

State Changes to New Version Needed (WG/Author) from New Version Coming ...

State Changes to New Version Needed (WG/Author) from New Version Coming by sob